On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de> wrote:
Myles Watson wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Myles Watson <mylesgw@gmail.com
> <mailto:mylesgw@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Uwe Hermann <uwe@hermann-uwe.de
>     <mailto:uwe@hermann-uwe.de>> wrote:
>
>         See patch.
>
>     I think it would be nice to figure out what we do with the
>     "onboard" device at the same time.
>
> Ping.  I think this patch is an improvement, but I didn't want the
> opportunity to remove more dead code pass by.  Any comments?
Acked-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan@coresystems.de> for removing all the
->onboard stuff.

>
>      from src/drivers/pci/onboard.c:
>
>     static void onboard_enable(device_t dev)
>     {
>         struct drivers_pci_onboard_config *conf;
>             conf = dev->chip_info;
>         dev->rom_address = conf->rom_address;
>     }
>
>     Does it make sense to change ROM handling so that only "onboard"
>     devices can have their ROMs run?  That's the way it used to be, right?
>
No. Plugin cards (graphics cards) need to have their ROM run, too.
I meant should "onboard" devices be the only ones allowed to have ROMs in CBFS, but I can see that that wasn't right either.  It just seems like when we made the change to CBFS we allowed a lot more devices to have ROMs in CBFS, and I was wondering if that was intentional, or a side-effect.

Thanks,
Myles